Plum City – (AbelDanger.net): United
States Marine Field McConnell has linked Matthias Chang’s limited-hangout video
speculations on the disappearance of MH Flight 370 to Serco’s development of
ad-hoc waypoint telemetry for the Boeing Company and the Kaya Identity chips
for contract killers allegedly hired by alumnae of the Down Low Club in
Chicago.

“To
this day, people in Chicago are still scared about being murdered for talking
about Barack Obama being gay or about what goes on at Trinity United with the
still-active “Down Low Club”. Young, gay, black men are mentored into
the club and are eventually paired up with often unattractive and difficult to
deal with straight black women who never have boyfriends (since guys don’t want
to have anything to do with them). A friend of mine in the “Think
Squad” of prominent black professionals I talk to regularly calls these
women “heifers” and says it’s very common for “cake boys”
to be paired up with “heifers” so that “dummies are fooled”
into thinking they are straight.”

McConnell
alleges that Serco launched the development of waypoint telemetry and killing chips
after the Unabomb campaign orchestrated by his DOJ Con Air sister Kristine
Marcy, failed to convince university and airline leaders of the merits of
deindustrialization or depopulationism.

McConnell
claims that Serco’s hot air banker HSBC and its co-investors
in the $92 trillion Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) helped finance Michelle
Obama’s 2008 election campaign for her husband because of her support for
carbon savings associated with partial-birth abortion.

McConnell
claims HSBC paid Barack Obama and David Archer at the University of Chicago to
develop a Kaya Identity on-line
calculator chip for Serco’s Boeing waypoint telemetry to help the CDP
track and kill citizens and support Down Low wag the dog stories such as Mr.
Chang’s.

McConnell
notes that he offered to brief Matthias Chang and/or representatives of MAS and
Malaysian government during a trip to Kuala Lumpur. McConnell’s trip to
Kuala Lumpur was during 15 April to 21 April, 2014 and triggered, in part, by
his prognostication of 30 March, 2014 [ see above and note date published ]
where he suggested a second explosive event if the BUAP was not exposed after
MH370’s commandeering of 8 March, 2014. The day following the capture of
MH370 McConnell had published a YouTube “Boeing Uninterruptible
Autopilot” which suggested how Serco’s alleged use of Boeing waypoint telemetry in both the electronic hijacking of MH 370 and the four planes which
flew Down Low decoy and drone maneuvers for Snuff Film 9/11 was
accomplished.

McConnell alleges that HSBC funded Bob Coulling – Serco’s in-house PFI sponsor – to set up the Airbus facility at Oakhanger so potential whistleblowers such as the Freescale employees on MH 370 could be tracked with the Kaya Identity Chip and snuffed at crime scenes pre-populated with tagged offenders to remove any evidence of a HSBC wag the hot-air dog snuff films.

McConnell alleges that Down Low Club alumna Michelle Obama extorted President Xi Jinping into an agreement to cut China’s carbon emissions after showing him snuff films of the murders of the 8 Freescale employees who designed the Kaya killing chips for planes tracked through the Airbus Telemetry and Command Station at Oakhanger managed by Serco’s Gary Butcher.

McConnell attributes the recent collapse in the value of the Serco share price and the resignation announcement of Serco chairman Alastair Lyons, to Abel Danger’s exposure of Serco’s hot-air telemetry tracking and the Down Low Club’s Kaya killing chip both of which were integral elements of Civil Case 1:08-1600 (RMC) which was a lawsuit capable of exposing how 9/11 was accomplished, and by whom.

Malaysian release of Inmarsat
450 knot flight solution and ping data (Shows
“possible turn” at approximately 2:28 MYT; places MH370 on a series
of concentric ping circles for duration off flight after the turn. Inmarsat
published solutions of “example southern tracks” give clues as to
ping circle radii, for which only the last one at 8:11MYT has been released)

Update: Assuming engine flameout at partial ping,
total range at flameout (out of fuel) is estimated as 3493 nm or 6469 km.
Compare to these estimates.

Update: Markup of estimated crash on search/buoy drift map. Just missed in
early search due to drift? Path lines up well with early NTSB solution as
shown. Flight could have gone further south, but Malaysia now indicates high
fuel burn in South China Sea. Original source.

Update: Conflicting information whether
partial ping could be engine flameout, plane in water (putting crash further
north) or something else. Also, I have heard a 777 could be expected to glide
for up to 150 km (80 nm), but have no citation, putting it further south. Until
resolved, above crash site seems most likely.

Inmarsat 450 knot solution shows two
slight breaks that correlate with intermediate pings and exactly with
hypothesized flight path timing of MH370 travelling SANOB to RUNUT and beyond
at about 460 knots. This is consistent with a single change of direction
at SANOB RUNUT, because Inmarsat
is drawing line segments between
pings. There is only a single course adjustment at RUNUT.

There are three Inmarsat pings after RUNUT
and the Inmarsat 450 knot solution shows them to be in straight course on their map. This is strongly indicative
that MH370 is travelling to another waypoint.

Using SCCI as a guess of
the last waypoint and 460 knots produces a location at the last full 8:11 ping
~2500 nm from the projected Inmarsat satellite location, indicating it fits the
data.

Implications:

Traveltime between IGARI and radar hit at
MEKAR provides bounds on what could have happened. Malaysia could further
refine by releasing time of first radar hit in addition to last.

Inmarsat could use this knowledge to
reexamine their ping data and see if this hypothesis fits their intermediate
ping data

Inmarsat in doing so could narrow the
location of the crash site considerably using this as a potential solution,
with 10 days remaining black box signal life.

Combined with a best estimate of fuel
range, a lest estimate of crash location could be obtained along a single line.

Implications of a deliberately plotted course via waypoints can possibly help solve what happened.”

“MH17 and MH370 flight controls
were hacked. The planes’ flight paths were diverted over restricted airspace
and subsequently shot down.

Both MH17 and MH370 made abrupt changes in
their flight paths. Both planes flew over restricted airspace. This was the work
of hackers who have taken control of those planes. The 777 is especially
vulnerable since it is completely computer controlled in all regards including
flight controls.

You might ask that if hackers took control of the planes then why not just
crash them immediately? They can’t. The 777’s software will not allow the
planes to crash. If a hacker attempted to do so, the software would prevent the
crash. The hackers’ only option was to fly the planes over dangerous areas so
that they would be shot down.

It is possible that both planes were from the same airline either because
someone inside the airline gave passwords which allow access to the planes’
controls or there is an online security vulnerability at Malaysia Airlines.

This is huge. Let’s get this pinned, people.”

“Serco Receives “Supplier of
the Year” from Boeing for Enterprise Architecture Expertise

Reston, VA (PRWEB) May 19, 2011 Serco Inc., a provider of
professional, technology, and management services to the federal government,
has been recognized as Supplier of the Year by The Boeing Company in the
Technology category for its state-of-the-practice Enterprise Architecture
solutions. The Boeing Supplier of the Year award is the company’s premier
supplier honor, presented annually to its top suppliers in recognition of their
commitment to excellence and customer satisfaction. This year’s 16 winners
represent an elite group among more than 17,525 active Boeing suppliers in
nearly 52 countries around the world. This selection was based on stringent performance
criteria for quality, delivery performance, cost, environmental initiatives,
customer service and technical expertise. This is the second time Serco has
been recognized as Supplier of the Year by Boeing. In January 2011, Serco also
received the Boeing Performance Excellence Gold Award in recognition of the
Company’s performance excellence.

“We are extremely honored to receive this recognition for our work in
support of Boeing. This prestigious award demonstrates our passion for
excellence and ability to apply Serco’s Enterprise Architecture expertise
across a broad range of applications,” said Ed Casey, Chairman and CEO of
Serco. “We continue to grow our EA practice, and over the past 15 years we
have deployed solutions to support enterprises and systems across federal and
commercial environments.”

Serco’s Enterprise Architecture Center of Excellence is based in Colorado
Springs, CO. The team provides a variety of services in support of Boeing’s
business units as well as research and development efforts. Serco’s
architecture employs object-oriented (OO)/Unified Modeling Language (UML) to
define, design and satisfy defense agencies’ mission-critical requirements,
including Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence
(C4I). This approach improves system
developer’s understanding of operational requirements and how best to integrate
enterprise operations and systems for the optimal fulfillment of C4I and other
operational needs.”

“Serco supported the AFSCN
communications support squadron in partnering with military and government
contractors to supervise an Air Force Satellite Control Network test effort at
Oakhanger, United Kingdom. Their innovative test procedures and creative
solutions provided a viable implementation plan designed to improve
communications capability .. The team’s outstanding support and will
bring new capabilities and enhanced services to our critical warfighting
mission.”

“The Stockholm Environment
Institute defines a carbon offset as “a credit for negating or diminishing
the impact of emitting a ton of carbon dioxide by paying someone else to absorb
or avoid the release of a ton of CO2elsewhere”.[16]

The University of Oxford Environmental
Change Institute defines a carbon offset as “mechanism whereby individuals
and corporations pay for reductions elsewhere in order to offset their own
emissions”.[4]

The Encyclopædia Britannica defines a
carbon offset as “any activity that compensates for the emission of carbon
dioxide (CO2) or other greenhouse gases (measured in carbon dioxide equivalents
[CO2e]) by providing for an emission reduction elsewhere.”[17]“

“The “Kaya
Identity”

We can actually play around with
greenhouse gas emissions scenarios ourselves. To do so, we will take advantage
of something known as the Kaya Identify. Technically,
the identity is just a definition, relating the quantity of annual carbon
emissions to a factor of terms that reflect (1)population growth, (2) relative
(i.e., per capita) economic expansion, measured by annual GDP in
dollars/person, (3) energy intensity, measured in terawatts of energy
consumed per dollar added to GDP, and (4) carbon efficiency, measured in
gigatons of carbon emitted per terawatt of energy used. Multiply these out, and
you get gigatons of carbon emitted. If the other quantities are expressed as a
percentage change per year, then the carbon emissions, too, are expressed as a
percentage change per year, which, in turn, defines a future trajectory of
carbon emissions and CO2concentrations.

Mathematically, the Kaya identity is
expressed in the form:

F = P * (G / P) *
(E / G) * (F / E),

where

F is global CO2 emissions from human
sources

P is global population growth

G is world GDP

E is global energy consumption

By projecting the future changes
in population growth (P), economic expansion (G/P), energy
intensity (E/G), and carbon efficiency (F/E), it is possible to make
an informed projection of future carbon emissions (F).
Obviously, population is important as, in the absence of anything
else, more people means more energy use. Moreover, economic
expansion measured by GDP per capita plays an important role, as a bigger
economy means greater use of energy. The energy intensity term is
where technology comes in. As we develop new energy technologies or improve the
efficiency of existing energy technology, we expect that it will take less
energy to incerase our GDP by and additional dollar, i.e., we should see a
decline in energy intensity. Last, but certainly not least, is the carbon
efficiency. As we develop and increasingly switch over to renewable energy
sources and non-fossil fuel based energy alternatives and improve the carbon
efficiency of existing fossil fuel sources (e.g., by finding a way to extract
and sequester CO2), we can expect a decline in this quantity as well,
i.e., less carbon emitted per unit of energy production.

Fortunately, we do not have to start from
scratch. There is a convenient on-line calculator here,
provided courtesy of David Archer of the University of Chicago (and a RealClimate blogger
). Below a brief demonstration of how the tool can be used. After you watch the
demonstration, use the link provided above to play around with the
calculator yourself.”

In 2000 and 2001, while Barack Obama served
as a board member for a Chicago-based charitable foundation, he helped to fund
a pioneering carbon trading exchange that is likely to fill a critical role in
the controversial cap-and-trade carbon reduction scheme that President Obama is
now trying to push rapidly through Congress.

During those two years, the Joyce
Foundation gave nearly $1.1 million in two separate grants that were
instrumental in developing and launching the privately-owned Chicago Climate
Exchange, which now calls itself “North America’s only cap and trade
system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects
worldwide.”

One of those gases is carbon dioxide, the
most ubiquitous greenhouse gas and the focus of the most far-reaching — and
contentious — efforts to combat “climate change.” On Monday, Obama’s
Environmental Protection Agency declared carbon dioxide a public health
threat.”

In order to protect their long term
investments, institutional investors must act to reduce the long-term risks
arising from environmental externalities.

CDP investor initiatives – backed in
2014 by more than 767 institutional investors representing an excess of
US$92 trillion in assets – give investors access to a global source of
year-on-year information [hot-air telemetry tracking] that supports long-term
objective analysis. This
includes evidence and insight into companies’ greenhouse gas emissions, water
usage and strategies for managing climate change, water and deforestation
risks.”

President Obama’s position as a
senator on issues like partial-birth abortion– where a live baby is pulled
partially out of the birthing canal, only to have its skull punctured with a
sharp object– is known to many voters. Though he voted
“present” a remarkable number of times, he voted three times against the Born Alive
Act in Illinois, which says that babies who survive late-term abortions are
entitled to all the rights and protections any other infant would receive.

Now, LifeNews has uncovered a fundraising
letter signed by Michelle Obama in 2004– just one year after President Bush
signed a bill banning partial-birth abortion– calling partial-birth abortion a
“legitimate medical procedure.”

We have all been concerned lately with the
rise of conservatism in this country, especially as it relates to women. You’ve
read the alarming news about the Justice Department’s request for hospitals to
turn over the private medical records of dozens of patients. This cynical ploy
is designed to intimidate a group of physicians and force them to drop their
lawsuit seeking to have the so-called partial birth abortion ban ruled
unconstitutional.

The fact remains, with no provision
to protect the health of the mother, this ban on a legitimate medical procedure
is clearly unconstitutional and must be overturned. ​[Emphasis added]

Here is a screen shot of the beginning of
the letter:

(Photo via LifeNews)

Michelle Obama has come under fire for the
letter before– particularly when her husband was running for president in 2008–
but the letter was primarily spoken of, not circulated in its entirety.

“I’d like to ask Michelle how in the
world she could in good conscience raise money from fear-mongering about this
barbaric abortion procedure,” pro-life advocate Jill Stanek said at the time.

When then-candidate Obama issued a warning
to keep family out of the public eye, Stanek added: “So it’s fine to kill
late-term babies, but we can’t risk hurting Michelle’s feelings about
it…”

Since
arriving in the White House, the Obamas have remained strong pro-choice
advocates, but are far less vocal about late-term abortions. When asked about
their previous stance, Obama representatives have said the legislation
interfered with the mother’s original right to choose.

If
anything, the Obama campaign has turned such issues on their heels. Their
longstanding support for abortion makes them protectors of “women’s
rights,” and those who disagree, or ask women to pay for their own birth
control, are accused of waging a “war on women.”